Auckland City Centre Rail Link - Business Case Review - Ministry of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Auckland City Centre Rail Link Business Case Review | May 2011 approaching or above $16 per day on average (assumed in the base case to occur by 2041). We have assessed the increased patronage impacts of additional employment that could be generated by the CCRL, particularly around stations where the District Plan and other tools could be used to facilitate increased land uses over and above those assumed in the modelling. Reasons why we believe the CCRL will generate increased employment opportunities include: o o o o Greater development density can be achieved as less space is required for parking. There is an assurance over the life of buildings that reliable transport is in place to cope with demands. Major public and private investment will be attracted once the CCRL is in place. As there is no agreement on what this future increase could be, a range of between 5,000 and 20,000 additional employees was assumed. Table 10: Parking Prices in Auckland CBD Parking Garages (April 2011) Car park Cost of all day early bird parking Mercury lane (ACC) $8 Downtown (ACC) $12 Civic (ACC) $12 Fanshawe St (ACC) $10 Victoria St (ACC) $12 Hobson St (Wilsons) $10 IAG house (Wilsons) $20 Lower Albert St (Wilsons) $13 ANZ centre (Wilsons) $14 Corner Wellesley St/Nelson St/Cook St (Tournament) $8 Lower level $9 Upper level $10 Under Cover Graham St (Tournament) $17 450 Queen Street (Tournament) $12 Corner Stanley St and Alten Rd (Tournament) $11 Fort Street, Auckland CBD (Tournament) $20 (only 20 spaces) Shortland St (Tournament) $15 Lumley Centre (Tournament) $17 City Centre 82 - 84 Albert Street (Tournament) $13.00 (LG - 4) $12.00 (L5 & 6) 49 Symonds Street (Tournament) $12.00 Hyatt (Tournament) $14 St Matthews (Tournament) $12 Railway Campus – Indoor (Tournament) $15 30
Auckland City Centre Rail Link Business Case Review | May 2011 Table 11: Forecast Trips into the CBD by Mode; base case results compared with policy case results (Morning peak period: 07:00- 09:00) Mode 2006 (from 2010 ARLTS modelling) Observed counts 2041: Revised MoT Base Case Estimates (modelled figures unless stated otherwise) No CCRL CCRL in Place AC/AT Policy case modelled estimates (CCRL in place) Total Trips @ 20,000 extra City Centre Employees Total Trips @ 5,000 extra City Centre Employees (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Rail 4,131 11,378 17,390 23,810 30,983 25,603 Bus 22,251 42,675 38,622 39,639 44,421 40,835 Ferry 3,297 3,612 3,548 4,256 5,058 4,456 Total PT 22,986 29,679 57,665 59,560 67,705 80,463 70,894 Car persons (inferred) 44,014 41,138 39,243 31,098 36,958 32,563 Total mechanised 67,000 98,803 98,803 98,803 117,420 103,457 Active 7,338 7,338 7,338 8,721 7,684 Total 106,141 106,141 106,141 126,141 111,141 In Table 11, columns 1, 3 and 4 are taken directly from the Transport Technical Aspects Review. The following observations can be made. Comparing columns (1) and (2) it can be seen that the models underestimated the total 2006 public transport demands into the CBD by 6,600 trips, or 29 percent. Comparing the central government agencies base case with the CCRL in place (column (4)) with the Auckland Council/Auckland Transport policy case (Column 5)), 6,400 additional rail passengers are estimated to use the CCRL, representing 12,400 more rail passengers than if there was no rail tunnel (column (3)). This would remove around 10,000 car trips from the city centre each peak period. The underestimate of public transport patronage into the city centre in 2006 by the model, indicates that the patronage uptake (and transport benefits) identified in the policy case could also be significantly underestimated. When considering the possible impacts of additional patronage resulting from increased employment resulting from the provision of the CCRL shown in columns (6) and (7), it can be seen that the CCRL could attract up to between 25,600 passengers and 31,000 passengers, depending on the level of additional employment. Table 11 also shows that of the public transport demands, bus remains the most significant and this makes it clear that the CCRL cannot be considered in isolation of a wider and more cost effective set of solutions to deal with the whole of the transport demand faced by the city centre over the next 20 to 30 years. In this regard, the opportunity offered by the CCRL to increase its role in meeting future demands has not been fully optimised, because even at eight trains per hour (tph) on each of the four of the routes, the CCRL has spare capacity to run more services (up to 30 tph in each direction). Therefore additional services could be added to respond to peak demands and to enable further rationalisation of bus services to the city centre. As well as providing bus operating cost savings, it would free up city centre street capacity for bus service growth from areas not served by rail. 31
Page 1 and 2: Auckland City Centre Rail Link Busi
Page 21: Auckland City Centre Rail Link Busi
Page 45: Auckland City Centre Rail Link Busi

Auckland City Centre Rail Link - Business Case Review - Ministry of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?